You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We use a ponder to track quests completion for our project which involves different actions taken with different contracts.
To add a quest, we basically add a new contract, a new schema and listen for the proper events with a new listener.
Once the new code is pushed, it triggers a new deployment which results in ponder having to restart from scratch (it wipes the tables, create new ones and repopulate them).
I will note that we are not using Railway's DB system but Supabase's.
This results in two issues ;
unavailable or incomplete data until complete sync (which can take some time for some big tables)
I/O to the database which results in more usage and thus cost
Perhaps there could be a flag (which would be false by default) that stops ponder to populate the tables from scratch and pick up from where it left with the use of checkpoints?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Following up here because have been in talks with Kyle on this, but having difficulties coming up with a long term solution. It takes a very long time for each deployment to become healthy (several hours+ depending on what is indexed) which effects production usage.
We use a ponder to track quests completion for our project which involves different actions taken with different contracts.
To add a quest, we basically add a new contract, a new schema and listen for the proper events with a new listener.
Once the new code is pushed, it triggers a new deployment which results in ponder having to restart from scratch (it wipes the tables, create new ones and repopulate them).
I will note that we are not using Railway's DB system but Supabase's.
This results in two issues ;
Perhaps there could be a flag (which would be false by default) that stops ponder to populate the tables from scratch and pick up from where it left with the use of checkpoints?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: